Actually @kmcmom13, I view it the complete opposite way. The whole problem starts from government intervention into higher education. The whole notion that everyone needs to go to college and everyone has the right to go to college if they want to is what drives college education demand to insane levels, allowing institutions to charge absurd amount and be wasteful with resources. On top of that the easy access to financial aid and government guaranteed student loans to practically anyone who wants it makes tuition money look like funny money, again allowing universities to charge prices not commensurate to what they offer and be generally wasteful with resources.
Contrary to what King Obama would lead you to believe as he sells his insane free community college for everyone plan (again propagating the myth that everyone deserves higher education), cost of higher education is very easily fixable:
Pull the government funded financial aid programs and just go to a scholarship model based on merit
Privatize student loans and remove the implicit government guarantees and let the free market set interest rates based on actual risk of repayments (I bet you engineers/business majors would get lower rates than say a art history major). this would give people pause before they borrow 100k to do a useless degree that they might or might not complete.
Just doing these 2 things and I guarantee you tuition will drop like a rock.
The lower cost and the merit based nature would make college much more affordable to the ones who truly will benefit from a college education.
^That’s not what’s going to happen. There is always a price point people are willing to take the risk and lend. I am just saying let the free market dictate what the rate should be, and this should give people pause before they rack up a 100k+ tab on 3% interest rate for degrees that project for jobs that pay barely more than someone without a college degree. Abundance of government funded financial aid and government guaranteed low rate student loan is what allows university to keep raising tuition and not face any consequences because it’s all funny money. The intent is to increase accessibility, what ends up happening is jsut a direct wealth transfer from the government to the institutions.
“Sometimes I feel like I should do this immersion for CC, where people seem to forget the average person lives in an apartment or dated house, goes out to a place nicer than McD only a few times a year, worries over the electric bill, and is up a creek if the furnace breaks or the car breaks down. These people are invisible to CC except when one of their kids “steals” an Ivy League spot.”
I am certain, Pizzagirl, that you have no idea how arrogant that sounds.
I doubt that you need to educate people on how fortunate they are. Most people here are completely aware of that fact, and how many others struggle. In fact, from what I have read, many of us have come from fairly impoverished backgrounds.
I think people can have a conversation on whatever they choose without needing a lecture about how much better off they are than others. I also think that one doesn’t need to preface every conversation with declaring that they know how good they have it, so others can understand that they really get it.
Uh, no. the family name is one you would recognize immediately. We learn about it in school.
Here’s the thing - some of the people (not all of course) who have this kind of money for as many generations as his family has, may truly not understand other people’s lives. The man is a really, really nice guy who doesn’t see it as bragging or anything. He is just clueless because everyone in his social circle is either as wealthy as he is, or they are less wealthy but politically powerful. (Money and power are pretty much equal in their eyes.)
The sad thing from my perspective is when this guy participates in setting economic policy, which he automatically gears towards the people he knows and understands.
A 250k salaried earner is distinguished from the “rich” by the fact that he/she still needs to work his/her daytime job to maintain the standard of living.
“Here’s the thing - some of the people (not all of course) who have this kind of money for as many generations as his family has, may truly not understand other people’s lives. The man is a really, really nice guy who doesn’t see it as bragging or anything. He is just clueless because everyone in his social circle is either as wealthy as he is, or they are less wealthy but politically powerful. (Money and power are pretty much equal in their eyes.”
I met someone like this last week. It was a bizarre experience, but she was such a sweet older lady, her intentions were kind. I sat next to her in first class, and mentioned how happy I was to be on that flight—during the east coast snowstorm mess, everything was sold out from JFK-SEA except for one ticket for $2,950. Of course, I would have never paid that, and managed to get a first class ticket (coach sold out) for $435. Now that was an incredible deal, especially since it was cheap enough for my company to pay for it, so it cost me nothing. She just looked at me with a blank stare, as if I’d been excited about getting the ticket for a dime, instead of a quarter, so what’s the big deal?
From a family of billionaires, everyone a trust fund baby, always has been wealthy. She seemed to feel a little bit shorted in life because she never worked, never had to think about money. I think she did miss out, living in such a different world than the vast majority of people, and never knowing it. But I don’t think there are many (any?) people like this on cc.
“A 250k salaried earner is distinguished from the “rich” by the fact that he/she still needs to work his/her daytime job to maintain the standard of living”
And also distinguished by the fact that since their income is through salary, they are taxed like crazy on it (especially in CA), so far less comes back to them in their paycheck than someone who gets that through investments.
I don’t blame college students for not seeing wealth differences among their classmates. They all pretty much wear jeans and tshirts, live in the same dorms, eat in the same dining hall. I don’t feel I can tell how rich or poor most people are by looking at them, especially here in CA where half the population tries to look grungy with old clothes and greasy hair, and the other half tries to look rich in brand name knockoffs and large fake diamond rings.
We have family friends that just spent $250,000 renovating their basement.She once told me she can not see how anyone could surive on $70,000 a year. I was making $50,000 at the time.
I have a sib who spent over $250K renovating two bathrooms! They have a lovely house and generally live fairly modestly, but make way more than we ever have or will. They gave me their Honda Accord that was only a few years old because we were wanting to buy a new car to replace our aging cars. It is our newest car, but we did spend quite a bit ($6500) taking out all the dents and dings their kids put into the car, learning to drive.
YMMV depending on the region and individual cultures of each campus. For instance, the campus culture I’ve observed at NYU and Columbia is such that there’s a critical mass minority of undergrads who dress finely well-beyond jeans and tshirts*, live off-campus in parental bought condos costing in the millions or rent $4000+ Manhattan apartments/month WITHOUT roommates in posh buildings with front door staff, etc.
Similarly, GWU had a thread here a while back about its culture of women wearing designer handbags and clothes and how it may turn off some students from lower SES or those from more fashion casual cultures.
Also, one can sometimes tell the SES of one’s classmates through other factors such as their casually discussing frequent(annual or even quarterly) family/individual vacations to expensive locales like Hawaii, casually discussing charities they/their family contributed to over the years/decades, being comfortably full-pay in boarding school & college, areas they/their families happen to live in, complaining about how FA/scholarship students are taking up places which “rightfully” belong to classmates like “them”, etc.
Some good points Cobrat but I think one would be constantly “tying themselves into knots” walking around worrying about what is going to “turn off” students from other socio-economic backgrounds or those from more “fashion casual cultures.” If you conduct yourself in that manner there is quite an array of groups one would have to “please.” I tell my children to strive to be authentic. They “are who they are” and if they pretend to be someone else they will attract people who will expect them to be that “someone else.” That is hard work on a consistent basis and does not make for lasting friendships.
I think people of all socio-economic backgrounds have the right to be who they are so long as they do not intrude on others. The last part is the hard part when you are considering things outside the fashion realm. But as far as fashion goes I see no issues at all - don’t judge for either expensive taste or casual taste.
Cobrat, while I think many of your points are valid I have never heard of students whining about FA students taking spots from their friends, at least not with their peers. In my observation it’s more subtle; the photos tacked up on the wall of the student and friends may be on tropical beaches, there’s no hesitation when friends suggest hitting a restaurant for dinner, books that are sometimes bought new instead of used, the expensive flip-flops being worn with those sweats and t’s.